Microsoft Azure App Service Reviews

It simplifies the deployment of applications, including those built with technologies like .NET or UCS, making it particularly valuable for microservices applications. It streamlines the deployment process, allowing developers to easily deploy and manage their applications without requiring dedicated DevOps engineers.

The primary and standout feature is ease of deployment.

Having a surplus of tutorials from Microsoft, rather than relying solely on documentation or features from other sources like YouTube, can be beneficial.

It offers excellent stability capabilities.

It offers configurability through the Azure portal. Adjusting resources such as CPU or memory is a straightforward process, making it easy to scale up or down based on your requirements. We manage multiple projects. Each project, whether it's a toll-free initiative or any other, typically involves three or four developers who contribute to the content and development processes.

Deployment is a straightforward process: after coding, you package the application into a folder, compress it into a ZIP file, and execute a command line with the ZIP file's path. This command includes the ZIP file's location, and Azure App Service takes care of running the application and exposing it without any further complexities. I can handle the deployment on my own.

The cost is reasonable.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is hosting web applications which can be Linux or Windows-based. Microsoft Azure App Service is a multi-tenant environment where customers can load and run the application. It is similar to a platform as a service.

The most valuable feature is the ability to scale the application. It scales dynamically and comes with two features. If you can find a fabulous feature in the Azure Functions app, it allows you to scale, so you don't need to worry about manually scaling or setting any scaling parameters. Then it automatically does the scaling on its own.

The other feature comes with VNet integration. So we can connect the Microsoft Azure App Service to a VNet so that it can privately communicate with other resources within Azure with a private IP. It also comes with the CDN feature, which can automatically load in some of your configuration files and use it instead of going back to storage to pick that up. It also has awesome features like backup, so you don't need to set up a recovery service, as it automatically does that. So you can back up the existing state of your application in case of any loss. In a nutshell, it has dynamic tools.

The outbound connectivity is not great but can be improved because, on virtual machines, the Microsoft Azure App Service uses four or five outbound IPs. So basically, if you want to communicate with an external source, you can use outbound IPs. For example, you must whitelist the outbound IP when communicating with an SQL database externally. However, because it's a multi-tenant environment and other customer applications are being shared on a skills tab, there are always limitations in the smart port. So each customer has a particular allocated smart port, which they should exhaust. It helps to work with the code. Regardless of features like a firewall where they have a hub and an environment they have features like a front door which can increase the smart port's limits to about 64,000. Hence, it will be good to have one IP without needing to add any other infrastructure.

Additionally, they can improve scaling the typical environment in terms of scalability. I believe the limit for the multi-tenant environment is about 20 to 30 maximum on the PV3. So if they can increase that, other than having these significant scaling limits for the Microsoft Azure App Service environment, which is about 200, that will also help.

Also, dedicating one outbound IP for App Service will go a long way.

We have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

They have a good support team. We don't think the front-end support is of concern because the front end has to talk to the internal respective application engineering team. Sometimes the core platform issues may take about two months or more. They can answer your queries, and they can help you do investigations.

Additionally, depending on your support package, if you have a premium plan, you get the best because you have support engineers who are intelligent. But you get different services with the pro-direct support plan. There's miscommunication between the front end and the application engineering team. I think that's something that they need to improve. On a premium plan, you get excellent support. I rate support for pro-direct a six out of ten and premium support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is easy. You can set it up through the portal, a template, or Terraform. It integrates with other features like Docker so if you have your image in Docker Hub or ECR, you can select the image, and it pulls those images in and runs your application.

It has many features, and other deployment methods like Bitbucket, FTP, DevOps, and GitLab can integrate these things into Microsoft Azure App Service. It is easy to set up because you don't need to start building servers. We also don't need to complete any maintenance. 

The price of this solution is competitive. It works as an App Service plan so you can have multiple App Services that are part of a plan. So, for example, you can have about 10 App Services in an App Service plan. It's like a VM, where you have different applications running and you are not charged for all of the applications. However, you are being charged for the plan, so I think it's worth having that setup. At the same time, you need to plan how your costs will be and their ranges of variations. As we call it, SKU is where you can easily factor in so it is okay in terms of price.

One of the best products is the Functions app, which comes with serverless computing in the sense that it gives you about a million transactions for free every month. That is one of the cheapest. So you don't need to worry about how long your function triggers, just that if it scales more than that and performs more transactions, you get charged for it. The exact cost depends on the SKUs.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our primary use case for this solution is for hosting web apps so people can deploy this application and host it on an app service.

We have found the scalability feature most valuable. When you host an application on Microsoft Azure App Service and have a lot of users, there are times that there will be high traffic. High traffic is when many people try to access the Microsoft Azure App Service simultaneously. So Microsoft Azure App Service can scale up to meet the demand of those trying to access it. It has been at approximately 98% availability, and if any maintenance is required, it will notify you. You can find an alternative solution and use multiple instances to mitigate the downtime.

For now, I don't think there are any improvements to highlight.

We have been using this solution for approximately a year and a half.

We have had a fun experience with customer service and support, but sometimes customer service and support can be challenging. However, all the challenges we face are related to technology.

There are two options for setting up the CLI shop and the portal. In terms of the portal, you can easily create an app service from the Azure portal. Some people are comfortable using the CLI shop, and some don't like going to the portal and creating the app service. I believe Azure did very well in that aspect.

The pricing is quite fair because of its scalability. Before you choose the type of plan you want, you should look at the workloads that the apps have and what your organization needs. For example, if you have minimal traffic, you can use the basic plan. There's a plan for every type of workload which determines the subscription cost.

I rate this solution nine out of ten. The solution is good. If somebody is considering using Microsoft Azure App Service, it is the best because it's easy to use, and there's a plan for every type of workload. Some features can give you certificates for the domain. If you already have an existing domain, you can bring it in to do it from Azure. Additionally, you can buy your domain and bind it to Azure, but if you already have an existing third-party domain, you can also use it with Azure.

We use this solution for everything I do. We use it on e-commerce platforms and for business activities. Currently, we're using the latest version of the App. However, we used the e-commerce version between 2019 and 2020.

The most valuable feature is the Power Apps because it is very user-friendly. In comparison, the Logic Apps and Azure functions are very robust.

I can't pinpoint a specific feature that can be included in the next release because Microsoft is making new changes to the app every day. Currently, everything works perfectly. 

We have been using this solution for five years. I am a Cloud Solution Architect with TCS, primarily on the Azure front. I research different types of Power Apps. I focus on POCs and deal with architecture data.

This solution is stable as we haven't faced problems working with it yet.

This solution is scalable.

I can't comment on my experience with the customer service and support team because we connect directly with Microsoft whenever we have any issues.

Positive

It is easy to set up if you have experience and knowledge working with it, but the setup is complex if you have no experience. 

Regarding pricing, I can't comment on pricing because I don't deal with issues related to pricing. 

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. My advice would be to gain experience, get an MSN license and practice before working in production environments.

We use Azure App Service for both app development and deployment. Sometimes, we use it for testing, and we also have several products running in production on the platform.

One valuable feature of Azure App Service for us is its integration with Azure DevOps, which we heavily rely on in our development process. It is user-friendly once you understand how it works, although getting to that point can be a challenge. Additionally, Azure App Service offers excellent integration with Microsoft infrastructure and developer solutions.

In terms of improvement, the technical support could be better.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure App Service for almost six years.

We have faced reliability issues due to configuration issues on our end, not the technology itself. While Azure App Service provides information on problems, sometimes it is not sufficient, and resolving issues can be time-consuming.

In terms of scalability, we haven't encountered any issues with Azure App Service. 

The support I have received, mostly from individuals in India, hasn't been very helpful. They tend to send long emails with lots of links, which often don't directly address my specific issue. This can be frustrating and time-consuming, as it doesn't efficiently solve the problem at hand. Azure App Service might offer better support with higher-priced plans, but those might be too costly for smaller external companies like ours. I would rate the support as a three out of ten.

Negative

I have used SolarWinds along with Azure App Service for web application development.

Installing Azure App Service has been challenging at times. Whether deploying through Azure pipelines or directly from Azure, the process can be time-consuming due to configuration complexities. We have encountered instances where resolving issues took days or even two to three weeks to complete the deployment.

Microsoft offers various pricing plans and licensing options, which initially seem reasonable, especially for small companies like ours. However, as we grow, the pricing can become less flexible. We pay for Azure monthly, while some licenses, like the Action Pack, are paid annually.

Overall, I would rate Azure App Service as an eight out of ten. It is a good tool but could be more user-friendly.

Microsoft Azure App Service is primarily used to host web-based applications.

Microsoft Azure App Service could improve by having better integration with on-premise solutions.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for approximately five years.

The stability of Microsoft Azure App Service is good.

Microsoft Azure App Service is scalable.

We have customers with 20,000 employees and others with 100,000 employees using this solution.

The support from Microsoft Azure App Service has been supporting my clients.

The setup of Microsoft Azure App Service is easy. The Microsoft Azure App Service can be created within seconds.

The cost of the solution is based on usage. It is less expensive than other solutions.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a ten out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is hosting applications such as function apps, web apps or API. The solution is deployed on cloud.

The ability to scale the App Service is very valuable. It allows you to host your App Service on Azure and provides the ability to bypass online. Additionally, it offers the ability to autoscale. That ability to scale out the infrastructure or the instances hosting the application is also a very good advantage in Azure which is cost-effective.

The solution can be improved by increasing the number of data centres worldwide.

We have been using this solution for approximately two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 1,000 people are currently using it across major sites.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate the service provided a ten out of ten.

The initial setup is neither easy nor difficult. However, it is simplified because documentation is provided to guide you. The documentation instructs how to host the applications and manage operations. In addition, the documentation aids in training and familiarizing people with the platform's requirements. 

There are different licensing options available, and we use the pay-as-you-go option. A student subscription is available with its requirements, other payment plans, and additional support. A free trial option is available to try out the platform and see how it works before subscribing.

We chose this solution because we support Microsoft Azure.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by increasing the number of data centres worldwide. I advise future users to understand how to use the platform and utilize the documentation provided online, which offers guidance.

We have our application on Azure and it does a REST call through the App Service, which in turn connects to our on-premises database.

We are using Tomcat and Java in conjunction with this service.

This product is user-friendly and the customization is good.

We wanted an application that we can use on the cloud to expose services outside of our premises. Azure provides a good platform and the integration is very strong, as well as scalable. You don't have to worry about procuring a server or maintaining it. You simply write the code, deploy it, and Azure takes care of the scaling and everything else.

There are a lot of features, such as scaling up and scaling down.

Debugging using Application Insights is a valuable feature.

Initially, there were some rare instances when the server went down because it was deployed on Linux. There are some features that are not available on the Linux-based deployment, yet are available on Windows. This is something that I think Microsoft has now caught up.

I have been using the Azure App Service for the past year.

We haven't had any issues with respect to stability.

It scales very well and in the case of our environment, it is good. We have approximately 20,000 people who are using the application.

The technical support is fantastic. We have calls with Microsoft every couple of weeks and they have been very helpful in giving us insights.

We were using Oracle prior to Azure, but that was on-premises. When we made the transition to the cloud, the company opted for Azure.

The initial setup is simple.

We have no complaints about the pricing.

Everything looks good and we are happy with this product. It seems to have everything that we need and I haven't seen any limitations. My advice to anybody who is looking at it is that it's a good platform to start building your integrations.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.